[ppml] "Who's afraid of IPv4 address depletion? Apparently no one."

[John Curran]

At 10:56 PM +0000 2/9/08, bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
>
>	i think a safe presumption is that this may be a
>	predominant structure as long as there are "arrogant
>	twits" who maintain the fiction that only IPv4 transport
>	is needed to get to their content/eyeballs.  e.g. if
>	facebook never supports IPv6 transport, this will be common.
>	Facebook will never see IPv6 demand and claim "all is well"
>	with IPv4 and the IPv6 hype is just that.

Facebook, Yahoo!, Google, MSN, Youtube, .... the list goes on and on.
I wouldn't expect any of them to see measurable demand for IPv6
until there's a sizable IPv6-only user community.

An IPv6-only user community is definitely going to happen (my own
opinion) but it's years away and occurs when ISP's have no real cost-
effective alternative for extending growth via IPv4.  Even if some user
communities go dual-stack before then, that's not exactly a compelling
reason for content providers to invest in IPv6 infrastructure since dual-
stack implies that they can already get the same users over IPv4.

Can you explain why there will be a significant base of IPv6-only users
before then?

Without IPv6-only users or some compelling benefits for IPv6 versus IPv4
transport, it's hard to see why the content community would invest ahead
of time.  Existing enterprises, consumers, and content providers all have
working infrastructure that still meets their needs once there is no readily
available free pool; it's the ISP business growth model that gets impacted
and hence the ISP community that needs to drive any desired transition.

/John